The Global ARCHICAD Community

[Jasonpaul]

Just gauging the popularity and usage of both Revit and ArchiCad in the industry. The school I'm in teaches and forces us to ArchiCad it in some of our works, which is odd considering that a majority of studios in our country uses solely Revit.

Is there something that ArchiCad that Revit does not offer? And the other way around?

[DGSketcher]

Archicad offers flexible working & adaptable tools from a company that cares about its users.

Revit - If you are happy supporting greedy corporations.

Seriously, you should try both before you make a choice, but a grounding in Archicad won't hurt.

[Jasonpaul]

Just gauging the popularity and usage watch movies free unblocked movies at forum of both Revit and ArchiCad in the industry. The school I'm in teaches and forces us to ArchiCad it in some of our works, which is odd considering that a majority of studios in our country uses solely Revit.

Is there something that ArchiCad that Revit does not offer? And the other way around?

Thank you so much

[Richard Morrison]

Both programs have their supporters, and Revit may have a larger market share where you are. However, I BELIEVE based on what I've seen, that ArchiCAD may offer you more creative forms for your designs, with its updated curtainwall, morph, and shell tools. I've tried Revit, but I can't tolerate the spreadsheet-like interface. (And I can't stand the company, either.) AC is likely to be much more fun to use, too.

[outpostarc]

Most of the people coming into our firm from a Revit background quickly adapt to ArchiCad and often prefer it after a time. We also do projects in Revit. We like Archicad for design fluidity and documentation (ifc consultant coordination works acceptably well). Revit is good for documentation and coordination and when teaming with another firm who uses Revit only. We use Archicad every time we are able. Our interiors team works with many other architects as well doing all of the interior design in ArchiCad while the architects are using Revit.

[Christophe Fortineau]

Archicad is since 80ies
Autodesk bought Revit like Google bought Sketchup when Autodesk understand they don't have BiM software
A this time Archicad was almost 20 years old

I don't trust a company which don't give the choice between buy or rent

Also collaboration solutions are very advanced at Graphisoft Archicad : collaboration between Windows and MacOS and by a client server environment : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Client%E2 ... rver_model

This kind of collaboration exist since 2009 and Autodesk don't have any equivalent solution even today

The list is very long but I think the best with Archicad deals with is own and simpliest way to communicate about the BIM .... BIMX : https://www.graphisoft.com/bimx/

[Matthew Lohden]

I use both extensively. ArchiCAD for almost 30 years and Revit for over 10.

ArchiCAD is by far the better tool for architectural design. Revit has far more features for building engineering but it is frankly pretty much crap as a design tool. Both are good at automating document production but ArchiCAD is much easier and more sophisticated in its capabilities in this regard. Revit has an advantage coordinating between disciplines due to its various engineering tools but this can be worked around using IFC.

In the US Revit dominates the large scale building market. ArchiCAD is used primarily by small to medium sized firms but many if not most of these use Revit. If you are in the US it is less likely that ArchiCAD will be useful to you but there are enough firms using it that it can still be handy experience to have. If you eventually start your own design oriented firm ArchiCAD is likely your best choice.

One downside to learning ArchiCAD is that if you end up working in Revit your frustration level may be higher for having seen the alternative. An analogy I like for the difference considering that they are both complex tools for difficult tasks is that using ArchiCAD is like dancing while Revit is more like wrestling. Revit has a tendency to force you to work the way it wants and will even occasionally change things without your knowledge or consent. The Revit developers also seem to have an unwritten rule in UI/UX of "Why do it in one or two clicks if you can make it take six to twelve?"

It can be a real struggle to get accurate models in Revit. The quality of models I see (including from major firms who shall remain nameless) is quite variable. I have seen some that would be difficult to make so badly in ArchiCAD. Sloppiness is easier to do and harder to avoid or fix in Revit. ArchiCAD is extraordinarily quick and accurate in the hands of an experienced user.

[KrisM]

As a contrary point of view, I find the amount of clicks in Revit to be less than Archicad. Also the selection of objects in Revit is much faster than AC. For example, if you place the cursor over a door in Rvt, you get instant selection as opposed to AC in which you have to find the magic spot to get selection.
Another slight difference, when drawing a line, wall etc. in Rvt, you get an inference (corner etc) instantly while in AC, you have to wait for a fraction of a second to get the inference. I initially found this quite frustrating but have learned to slow down a bit.
As far as accuracy goes, both programs have their hurdles to overcome and inaccuracy is principally user error.

[Richard Morrison]

You might try playing around with "Quick Selection" mode and adjusting inference, info, and guideline delay times in the Work Environment. These can be set to zero and are then pretty instantaneous.

[KrisM]

I have played with those settings but there is a basic difference in how AC works. I haven't experienced this finickiness in any other 3d/cad software I've used. Another thing I don't understand is that in Revit, I have never waited for a view to regenerate. Whatever change I make in a view is instantly fixed in any other view I open. Not a deal killer but exhibits the fact that both AC and Rvt operate quite differently under the hood.